Neat Image Noise Profiles

[dmerger]

Has anyone made any particularly good NI noise profiles for negative films scanned with the original Minolta 5400 at 5400 ppi?  If so, would you be willing to share the profiles via e-mail or post them for download?  Profiles made with the NI calibration target would be especially helpful.

[Chris_T]

Has anyone made any particularly good NI noise profiles for negative films scanned with the original Minolta 5400 at 5400 ppi?  If so, would you be willing to share the profiles via e-mail or post them for download?  Profiles made with the NI calibration target would be especially helpful.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=64110\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, I have made chrome NI profiles for the 5400 based on the NI calibration target. The process is well documented and easy. While I have not spent much time analyzing how "good" the profiles are, they certainly do the job reasonably well. Why not do it yourself?

[dmerger]

I haven't used Neat Image with negative film, yet. I've only used NI with Fuji Velvia 50 and Provia 100f.

I tried auto profiling and manual profiling for individual slides and to create film type profiles. I got good results. I then made NI profiles using Wolf Faust IT-8 target slides. The results using the IT-8 targets are much better than my prior methods. I now get a virtual total elimination of grain/noise and no loss of detail (even when viewed at 100% up to 1600%).

My experience with slide film showed me how much better NI performed when I made a good film type profile. I was hoping that I could get closer to those results with negative film if I could acquire good negative film profiles, too.  

I've contemplated making a NI calibration target and shooting it with various negative films to create my own NI noise profiles, and I may do so if I can't locate profiles.  I was hoping to save the time and effort required to make my own profiles.  Given the difference between slide and negative film, however, I'm not sure that NI profiles for negative film will be as successful as for slide film.  

In my limited experminents with negative film, I can't get close to the results I get with my slide profiles.  My photos don't have enough uniform areas to create good noise profiles.  Hence my interest in profiles made with calibration targets.

[Chris_T]

I haven't used Neat Image with negative film, yet. I've only used NI with Fuji Velvia 50 and Provia 100f.

I tried auto profiling and manual profiling for individual slides and to create film type profiles. I got good results. I then made NI profiles using Wolf Faust IT-8 target slides. The results using the IT-8 targets are much better than my prior methods. I now get a virtual total elimination of grain/noise and no loss of detail (even when viewed at 100% up to 1600%).

My experience with slide film showed me how much better NI performed when I made a good film type profile. I was hoping that I could get closer to those results with negative film if I could acquire good negative film profiles, too. 

I've contemplated making a NI calibration target and shooting it with various negative films to create my own NI noise profiles, and I may do so if I can't locate profiles.  I was hoping to save the time and effort required to make my own profiles.  Given the difference between slide and negative film, however, I'm not sure that NI profiles for negative film will be as successful as for slide film. 

In my limited experminents with negative film, I can't get close to the results I get with my slide profiles.  My photos don't have enough uniform areas to create good noise profiles.  Hence my interest in profiles made with calibration targets.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=64191\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't shoot negatives and can't help you there.

Are the Wolf Faust IT-8 targets actually recorded on Velvia 50 and Provia 100f? If not, I wonder how NI profiles based on these targets can be "much better". I try to avoid that plastic look from excessive noise removal and attempt to retain some hint of "film grain" in the final prints.

Can you upload your Velvia 50 and Provia 100f profiles, IT-8 based and NI target based, at NI for comparison?

[dmerger]

Yes, the Wolf Faust IT-8 targets are actually recorded on Velvia 50, Provia 100f as well as other film types.

My profiles don't meet NI's stated criteria for posting profiles since I made my profiles manually, not with the auto function of NI.  In any event, I'd be surprised if there is much difference between using IT-8 targets and using the NI calibration target.  I haven't made any profiles using the NI calibration target.

[Chris_T]

Yes, the Wolf Faust IT-8 targets are actually recorded on Velvia 50, Provia 100f as well as other film types.

My profiles don't meet NI's stated criteria for posting profiles since I made my profiles manually, not with the auto function of NI.  In any event, I'd be surprised if there is much difference between using IT-8 targets and using the NI calibration target.  I haven't made any profiles using the NI calibration target.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=64277\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My mistake. I thought that you were comparing an IT-8 based profile vs a NI calibration target based profile.

My experience with a NI calibration target based profile is as follows:

- it is better for scans without many areas that are uniform in tones/colors and without fine textures.

If you have not tried generating a NI calibration target based profile, it is worth a shot. Much cheaper than getting an IT-8 target.

BTW, I'm unaware of NI's profile posting criteria. Why did you manually generate the IT-8 profiles? I would assume auto profiling is the way to go, just like using the NI calibration target.

[dmerger]

I purchased my IT-8 targets to color profile my scanner.  Since I already had the targets, I decided to use them to create NI noise profiles.  I doubt that I would have purchased the IT-8 targets just to create NI noise profiles.

I made my NI noise profiles manually so that I could maintain complete control over how the profiles were made, such as careful selection of the target patches.   I expect that auto profiling would have produced similar results, but I haven't made a comparison.  Perhaps I'll do so just out of curiosity.

[Chris_T]

I made my NI noise profiles manually so that I could maintain complete control over how the profiles were made, such as careful selection of the target patches.   I expect that auto profiling would have produced similar results, but I haven't made a comparison.  Perhaps I'll do so just out of curiosity.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=64377\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm unsure how NI auto profiles: whether it chooses just a single location or multiple locations. Since the NI calibration target is made up of multiple patches (ditto for a portion of IT-8), and the instruction is to use auto profile, my suspicion is that auto profiling is based on multiple locations. I also suspect that NI's auto profiling analyzes different locations and the profiling is based on only the locations that are uniform and have no fine textures in them. If so, both the NI calibration target and IT-8 should work, and perhaps the IT-8 will be somewhat better because it has more patches. This is a good question to bring up in the NI forum.